To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

School board and superintendent accountability: a policy analysis regarding the implementation of the Ralph M. Brown Act

SCHOOL BOARD AND SUPERINTENDENT ACCOUNTABILITY:
A POLICY ANALYSIS REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT
by
Craig Gerald Côté
________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2010
Copyright 2010 Craig Gerald Côté

The Ralph M. Brown Act’s enforcement language implies striking a proper balance between school public officials and the public at large. This study of The Brown Act’s enforcement provisions is presented in the context of school districts. The investigation focused on the following overarching question: Does a policy analysis support a finding that in its application, The Brown Act appropriately strikes a balance between the right of Boards of Trustees and school officials to govern, and the public’s right to accountability of that governess? This overarching question is addressed by four research questions that lead to the following key findings.; Key Findings; 1. Most participants believe that The Brown Act strikes an appropriate balance between those who govern and those who have a right to accountability of that governess.; 2. Close scrutiny reveals that in its enforceability, The Brown Act fails to strike an appropriate balance between the key actors: those who govern and those who have a right to accountability of that governess.; 3. California should look to the leadership of the 29 other states which have imposed personal responsibility provisions to their “Sunshine Laws,” laws otherwise similar to The Brown Act.; 4. Since its inception of 1953, there has been no successful criminal prosecution for violation of The Brown Act. As a result, this gives rise to a belief of no true personal accountability. Knowing there is no personal culpability, it seems that some superintendents and boards of trustees have acted with impunity, unintentionally or consciously. Therefore, there is not sufficient accountability for superintendents and boards of trustees.; 5. Superintendents and boards of trustees have the upper hand in the balance of power for enforceability of The Brown Act’s provisions. The public at large and district attorneys are unable to stop egregious violations of The Brown Act.

SCHOOL BOARD AND SUPERINTENDENT ACCOUNTABILITY:
A POLICY ANALYSIS REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
THE RALPH M. BROWN ACT
by
Craig Gerald Côté
________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
May 2010
Copyright 2010 Craig Gerald Côté